search

openenglishbible / Open-English-Bible

A CC0 licenced modern English translation of the Bible
http://openenglishbible.org
124 stars 35 forks source link

Mark 1:4 - "on" Old-Fashioned #277

Closed DJHugger closed 12 years ago

DJHugger commented 12 years ago

The OEB currently reads,

"And in fulfillment of this, John the Baptizer appeared in the wilderness, proclaiming a baptism on repentance, for the forgiveness of sins. "

"baptism on repentance" seems old-fashioned. Recommend changing to "baptism of repentance" as in most modern translations:

"And in fulfillment of this, John the Baptizer appeared in the wilderness, proclaiming a baptism of repentance, for the forgiveness of sins. "

openenglishbible commented 12 years ago

But 'of' isn't much better :)

'Baptism of repentance' isn't a modern non-Biblish phrase, it's a KJV phrase which has stuck around... it's much more ancient than 'baptism on repentance'!

I think probably the real question is whether we want to go as far as (for example) the CEB: "John was in the wilderness calling for people to be baptized to show that they were changing their hearts and lives and wanted God to forgive their sins. "

DJHugger commented 12 years ago

I think your right about 'of'. It sounds like it makes more sense but I don't think it actually makes more sense. I seem to remember that the REB has something like "in token of". How about "as a sign of" or "as a symbol of"?:

"And in fulfillment of this, John the Baptizer appeared in the wilderness, proclaiming a baptism as a sign of repentance, for the forgiveness of sins."

openenglishbible commented 12 years ago

'baptism of repentance' is one of those phrases which you hear so often you forget that to someone who hasn't heard it before it isn't really normal English... :)

I agree that a change like the one you propose would make the passage clearer - and the intended meaning makes sense to me. However the meaning of baptism is a contested area with Christianity (and so within Bible translations) and I want to make sure I am on good grounds. I'll close this for now, but will go away and do some research.

DJHugger commented 12 years ago

I think "as a sign of" is a pretty theologically neutral way of putting it. I understand how the language of "sign" might give some Christians pause but being "as a sign of" is a description but not an exhaustive definition of the act. Also keep in mind that in this passage we're not really talking about Christian baptism but the baptism preached by John which, while analogous, is distinct from Christian baptism (I'm unaware of any Christian tradition which sees them as identical but I could be wrong).